`Tel: 571.272.7822
`
`Paper 8
`Entered: November 29, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`TRACBEAM, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2018-01724
`Patent 7,525,484 B2
`
`
`
`Before DAVID C. McKONE, JAMES A. TARTAL, and
`MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`TARTAL, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Joint Motion to Dismiss Petition
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.71(a), 42.72, 42.74
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01724
`Patent 7,525,484 B2
`
`
`Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition (Paper 2) seeking
`institution of inter partes review of claim 49 of U.S. Patent No. 7,525,484
`B2 (Ex. 1001, “the challenged patent”). Petitioner subsequently informed
`the Board that it had reached an agreement with Patent Owner TracBeam,
`LLC, to settle this proceeding and sought authorization to file a joint motion
`to dismiss this proceeding. With our authorization, the Parties filed a Joint
`Motion to Dismiss the Petition. Paper 6. A copy of the Settlement
`Agreement executed by the Parties was filed along with the Joint Motion to
`Dismiss. Ex. 1018. The Parties also filed a Joint Request to Treat
`Settlement Agreement as Business Confidential Information Pursuant to
`35 U.S.C. § 317(b). Paper 7.
`The Parties represent that they have settled their dispute with respect
`to the challenged patent and memorialized their settlement in the written
`agreement. Paper 6. This proceeding is at an early stage. Patent Owner has
`not yet submitted a Preliminary Response, we have not considered the merits
`of the Petition, and we have not yet instituted a trial.
`In view of the early stage of this proceeding, the Parties’
`representations, and the concurrent settlement of the district court lawsuit,
`we determine that it is appropriate to dismiss the Petition and terminate the
`proceeding. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.71(a). Therefore, the Joint Motion to
`Dismiss the Petition is granted. We also grant the request of the Parties to
`treat the Settlement Agreement as business confidential information. This
`paper does not constitute a final written decision pursuant to
`35 U.S.C. § 318(a).
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01724
`Patent 7,525,484 B2
`
`
`For the foregoing reasons, it is:
`ORDERED that the Joint Request to Treat Settlement Agreement as
`Business Confidential Information Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) is
`granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Settlement Agreement (Ex. 1018)
`shall be treated as business confidential information and shall be kept
`separate from the patent file; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Dismiss the Petition
`is granted and the proceeding is dismissed.
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01724
`Patent 7,525,484 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`David L. McCombs
`Theodore M. Foster
`Dina Blikshteyn
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`david.mccombs.ipr@haynesboone.com
`ipr.theo.foster@haynesboone.com
`dina.blikshteyn.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Sean Luner
`DOVEL AND LUNER, LLP
`sean@dovel.com
`
`Steven Sereboff
`SOCAL IP LAW GROUP LLP
`ssereboff@socalip.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
